UN-quality Assurance For Farming Programs

Quality assurance in agricultural
education and training

Jan Beniest
World Agroforestry Center
Wayne Nelles
International Potato Center
Thomas Zschocke
UNU Institute for
Environment and Human
Security
UN CSD-16
Learning Centre
May 15, 2008
May 15, 2008
CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET
Quality assurance in agricultural education and training
Overview
DESD and agriculture
Quality assurance in agriculture
Developing a good quality training course
Quality assurance in education
Revisiting the good quality training course
Making quality assurance work
Quality assurance models in education
The CGIAR and quality assurance in AET
DESD and quality assurance
May 15, 2008
Overview
May 15, 2008
Quality standards for sustainable agricultural research and education
The Tikapapa initiative
May 15, 2008
The Tikapapa initiative

Linking small scale farmers from the Andean
highlands in Peru to new urban markets, taking
advantage of potato biodiversity and tap into new
market opportunities
May 15, 2008
Key issues/problems/challenges (1)
Lack of international policy or academic consensus on what counts as

quality in (ecologically sustainable) agricultural research, education,
training and capacity-building.
Lack of clear policy or high level academic dialogue forums on ecological or

agricultural sustainability issues in quality education debates or agreements
to date.
Questions/concerns about current subjectivity (political, corporate) with lack

of scientific certainty and unclear objectivity (scientific or pedagogical
contents/processes) in empirically defining or measuring quality.
Debates with some preliminary policy, corporate or academic documents

pointing to sustainability goals standards and action. (But policy
incoherence, and lack of shared/uniform implementation).
Sustainable agriculture education (academic courses, degrees, etc.)

including agro-ecology, food systems, etc. is an emerging and growing
academic field.
May 15, 2008
Key issues/problems/challenges (2)
However, there is a decline in the integrity and independence (including

threats to academic freedom and human rights violations) of public sector
higher education.
Globalization across the education sector is increasing pressures toward

privatization while private/industrial training backed by private interests,
money, and foundations guiding research goals.
No clear political mandate or shared academic vision to support quality

public research or education in sustainable agriculture (either in curriculum
content, through scientific peer-review processes, institutional accreditation
mechanisms, or program evaluations).
Continued tensions/conflicts between
industrial, chemical, biotech, GMO and export-led agriculture models

(with associated corporate business training and research
needs/demands) and
local, organic, small farmer, subsistence approaches to academic

studies/educational content (with different perspectives on quality
learning needs, ethics, human rights, farmers rights, indigenous rights,
labour quality, agro-ecology, and environmental/social sustainability).
May 15, 2008
UN DESD (2005-2014)-UNESCO lead agency
Quality dimensions
The goalis to integrate the principles, values, and practices of

sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning.
This educational effort will encourage changes in behaviour that will create
a more sustainable future in terms of environmental integrity, economic
viability, and a just society for present and future generations.
(http://www.unesco.org/education/desd/)
As UNESCO notes
EFA and the MDGs introduced the concept of quality education into their
goals and international development targets. Providing any education,
regardless of quality, is not the goal. A myth exists that access must come
before quality. Both can occur simultaneously. A large debate continues
about what a quality education is.
May 15, 2008
UNESCO Quality perspectives (1)
At this point in time, quality education has essential characteristics that

can be implemented in many culturally appropriate forms. Quality
education:
supports a rights-based approach to all educational endeavours. Education

is a human right, and therefore quality education supports all of the human
rights;
is based on the four pillars of Education for All learning to know, learning
to do, learning to live together and with others, and learning to be (Delors
et al., 1996);
views the learner as an individual, a family member, community member,

and a global citizen and educates to create individual competency in all four
roles;
upholds and conveys the ideals of a sustainable world a world that is just,
equitable, and peaceable, in which individuals care for the environment to
contribute to intergenerational equity;
May 15, 2008
UNESCO Quality perspectives (2)
takes into consideration the social, economic, and environmental contexts

of a particular place and shapes the curriculum or programme to reflect
these unique conditions. Quality education is locally relevant and culturally
appropriate;
is informed by the past (e.g. indigenous and traditional knowledge), is

relevant to the present, and prepares individuals for the future;
builds knowledge, life skills, perspectives, attitudes and values;
provides the tools to transform current societies to more sustainable

societies;
is measurable.
(from: United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable

Development 2005-2014: International Implementation Scheme,
ED/DESD/2005/PI/01, p. 27)
May 15, 2008
10
Overview
May 15, 2008
11
Dimensions of food quality

Quality
ability of a set of inherent
characteristics of a product, system
or process to fulfill requirements of
customers and other interested
parties (ISO 9000:2000)
May 15, 2008
12
Dimensions of food quality
Process
attributes
Public /
corporate
certification
May 15, 2008
Quality
attributes
Extrinsic
indicators
Extrinsic
indicators
Product
attributes
Intrinsic
indicators
13
Codex Alimentarius (FAO & WHO)

A collection of food standards, codes of practice,
guidelines and other recommendations
May 15, 2008
14
Codex Alimentarius (FAO & WHO)
May 15, 2008
15
Good Agricultural Practices (FAO)

An international regulatory framework and
associated codes of practice to minimize or prevent
the contamination of food
May 15, 2008
16
Related ISO standards

ISO/IEC 17025:1999 Standard or Principles of Good
Laboratory Practice
ISO 22000: 2005 Food safety management systems -Requirements for any organization in the food chain
ISO 9001:2000 Quality management systems -Requirements
May 15, 2008
17
Conducting quality agroforestry research
May 15, 2008
18

Context and justification
Priority setting
Hypothesis formulation
Methods and tools
Results
Upscaling
May 15, 2008
19
May 15, 2008
20
Conducting quality agroforestry training

COORDINATION
PARTNERSHIP
Identification & Management
SITUATION ANALYSIS
Opportunities & Needs
Identification Assessment
Prioritization
Group Learning
(In-service training)
Global Collaborative
Research for Development
Programmes & Activities
Individual Learning
(Fellowships Programme)
Participatory Curriculum
Development
Learning Resources
(multiple formats)
LEARNING
Learning Implementation
(Training-of-Trainers)
Monitoring Evaluation
Follow-up
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
May 15, 2008
21
Conducting quality agroforestry training
May 15, 2008
22
Overview
May 15, 2008
23
Teaching research methods on-line
May 15, 2008
24
Managing a blended learning event
May 15, 2008
25
Views from participants & facilitators
May 15, 2008
26
Conclusions
Select small and homogeneous target groups
Provide an introduction course on the LMS used
Intensive facilitation is necessary (retention)
Requires adapted instructional design
Provide SMART learning objectives / instructions
Selected resources/references on a DVD / CD
Detailed impact assessment/cost efficiency
analysis needed
Think of the potential to develop Open
Educational Resources
May 15, 2008
27
Overview
May 15, 2008
28
Concepts of quality in education

Traditional
notion
Excellence as
exceding high
standards
Excellence as
zero defects
Quality culture
Quality as
exceptional
Checking
standards
Quality as
perfection /
consistency
Quality in
education
Empowering the
participant
Quality as
transformation
Quality as fitness
for purpose
Quality as value
for money
Enhancing the
participant
Customer
charters
Fulfilling the
mission
Customer
satisfaction
Performance
indicators
Source: Adapted from Harvey & Green (1993)

May 15, 2008
29
Dimensions of quality in education

Staff-student
interface
Are resources
not wasted?
Quality of
design
Economy
Resources
Efficiency
Teaching
process
Choice of Quantity
services
Equity &
accessibility
Are all individual
learners and groups
treated equally?
Management
Does the service achieve

the intended benefit for
the individual learner?
Quality of
performance
Learning
outcome
Quality
Technical
effectiveness
and user
acceptability
Quality of conformance
Can learners get to the

services when they
need it?
Educational service
Relevance
Do services satisfy
learners
expectations ?
Is the overall service
provision the best that
could be achieved?
Source: Adapted from Maxwell (1992); Srikanthan & Dalrymple (2002); Mergen et al. (2000)
May 15, 2008
30
Converging quality assurance approaches

Purpose
Philosophy & incentives
Audience
Administration & authority
Financing - costs & resources
Level of analysis
Scope & focus
Mechanisms & methodology
Product
May 15, 2008
31
Overview
May 15, 2008
32
The ICRAF training process

RESEARCH
DIAGNOSIS
IDENTIFICATION
OF
TRAINING NEEDS
EVALUATION
Feedback /
Validation
IMPLEMENTATION
TRAINING ACTION
Design /
Development
TRAINING
OBJECTIVES
TRAINING
PLAN
May 15, 2008
33
Overview
May 15, 2008
34
Discussion questions
Question # 1 - How should we define and measure quality for Sustainable

Agricultural Research and Education? And how can this contribute to
international public goods knowledge products?
Question # 2 If we wish to strengthen partners capacities for doing

quality Agriculture research and education what are the best processes,
methods and content? What values, development mandates and
pedagogies should inform us?
Question # 3 - Can Agenda 21, complementary instruments and other

consensus agreements provide international guideposts in developing
quality standards for (sustainable) agricultural research and education?
(Return to later)
Question # 4 - How can we strengthen (and improve or measure the

quality of) education or research for agriculture sector sustainable
livelihoods amid different/conflicting views?
May 15, 2008
35
Overview
May 15, 2008
36
Basic concepts of ISO 9000:2000 & EFQM
May 15, 2008
37
Basic concepts of ISO 9000:2000 & EFQM
May 15, 2008
38
ISO 19796-1
ISO
ISO 9000
9000
EFQM
EFQM
European
European
DE
DE GuideGuidelines
lines
ECTS
ECTS
Design
Learning
Scenario
Author
Author Guide
Guide
ISO
ISO 9241
9241
Accessibility
Accessibility
Guidelines
Guidelines
May 15, 2008
EFQM
EFQM QAA
QAA
QoL
QoL
BenchBenchmarks
marks
Management
Management
Approaches
Approaches
Media
Media
Association
Association
Certificate
Certificate
Implement
Learning
Scenario
LOM
LOM
SCORM
SCORM
SGML,
SGML, XML,
XML,
RDF,
XHTML
RDF, XHTML
Auto
Auto
Industry
Industry
Standard
Standard
Evaluate
Learning
Scenario
DIN
DIN Criteria
Criteria
ASTD
ASTD Criteria
Criteria
Organizations
Organizations
Criteria
Criteria
39
ISO 19796-1
ID
Category
Process
Name
Description
3.2
Conception
/ D e sign
Concept
of the
con tents
Concept of learning and teaching

co ntents
Relations
1 .1 Demand analysis
2.2 Qualifications
Content selection
Sub pro cess(es)
Content Design
1. Learner Demand:
of the learner.
Objective
The goal is to provide contents adapted to the needs and demand
2. Adaptation: Each course shall provide different content presentation formats and entry
points based on the user experience.
Method
1.
A prototype of the content shall be provi

ded to a group of learners represent
tives. In a co nsensus process, the contents shall be prioritized and agreed on.
2.
For each course, classify groups of learners according to their learning type.
Adapt presentation format and methods according to these le
arning types.
a-
1. Documentation of planned and agreed contents

Result
Actors
Metrics /
Crite ria
Standards
2. Periodically, evaluate learning performance of different learners (test groups).

Curriculum designer, didactic experts, institution accreditation authority, teacher, lear
er s represent atives
n-
The content are measured based on their relevance, importance, exemplaricity,

Higher Education Standards
Annotation
/ Example
May 15, 2008
40
Baldridge education criteria
May 15, 2008
41
Overview
May 15, 2008
42
Training challenges in the CGIAR

CGIAR training is in high demand by national
partners and clients
Limited human and financial resources for capacity
strengthening
Centers work mostly in isolation often leading to
duplication of efforts
Learning materials are dispersed and in many
different formats
Focus remained on more traditional learning
approaches
May 15, 2008
43
Improving training in the CGIAR

Develop appropriate quality assurance protocols
Ensure better coordination within and among
Centers
Exploit the advantages of ICT such as e-learning
May 15, 2008
44
Opportunities for training in the CGIAR

Create a CGIAR training community of practice
that works together to address the learning needs
of our partners in research, development, training
and education
Make use of recent advances in ICT to avail CGIAR
learning resources in agriculture and natural
resources management to an international
learning community
May 15, 2008
45
Learning objects for training
May 15, 2008
46
Learning object metadata
Source: IMS Meta-data Best Practice Guide for IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 Standard for Learning Object Metadata V. 1.3
May 15, 2008
47
Repositories and referatories
May 15, 2008
48
CGIAR Learning Resources Center
May 15, 2008
49
CGIAR Learning Resources Repository
May 15, 2008
50
CGIAR Learning Management System
May 15, 2008
51
Overview
May 15, 2008
52
Guiding education quality
Policy and legal frameworks / approaches

UNESCO/UN (and other) Perspectives on International Standard
Setting Instruments (for Education & Research) Views / Agreements
/ Laws on Education & Research implicating quality imperatives (and
debates) for agriculture / sustainable development sectors:
Resolutions, Declarations and Recommendations (soft law, but

authoritative and symbolic intentions of governments and other
signatories or executing agencies).
Conventions (hard law, authoritative and binding intentions of

governments and other signatories, supported/upheld in mandates of
executing agencies.
Guidelines (for legal or process interpretation or implementation / actions /

outcomes) prepared by UN Secretariats, committees, international
commissions, monitoring bodies, etc.
Action plans (esp for UN/International System) indicating timed, goal

oriented intentions or steps to achieve certain standards/objectives (e.g.
education, agriculture, environment, etc.).
May 15, 2008
53
Sustainable agriculture education
Standard-setting instruments (1)

1992
Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
1992
Agenda 21
1992
Convention on Biological Diversity
1993
Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (World Conference on

Human Rights)
1996
Rome Declaration on World Food Security
1997
Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching

Personnel
1998
World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century:

Vision and Action and Framework for Priority Action for Change and
Development in Higher Education
May 15, 2008
54
Sustainable agriculture education
Standard-setting instruments (2)

1999
Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific Knowledge,
1999
Science Agenda - Framework for Action
2000
United Nations Millennium Declaration, 55/2. (setting MDGs)
2001
Lneburg Declaration on Higher Education for Sustainability
2001
Revised Recommendation concerning Technical and Vocational

Education
2001
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and

Agriculture
2005
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
May 15, 2008
55
Examples of quality education and research implications
Rio Declaration
1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
Quality issues (for education/capacity-building) are not well articulated, but

some key debates and goals are implied.
Principle 15 - PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE -:
In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be

widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are
threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall
not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent
environmental degradation.
(MANY IMPLICATIONS - Especially now for defining and operationalizing

(ecologically) sustainable agriculture, including more open/multistakeholder dialogue, learning partnerships, as well as quality and types
of technical/bio-safety training and quality of education for
biodiversity conservation. This is of particular concern if capacity
strengthening for biotechnology, crop improvement training/research
support continues, without due regard for the precautionary approach)
May 15, 2008
56
1992 Agenda 21
1992 Agenda 21
Quality issues are not explicit, but goals/standards for defining or doing
environmental management, sustainable agriculture, and achieving
sustainable development objectives (through education, sciences and
capacity building) are.
SECTION III. STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF MAJOR GROUPS

Chapter 31 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITY
Note in particular the suggestion for: The adoption and implementation of

ethical principles and codes of practice for the scientific and technological
community that are internationally accepted could enhance professionalism
and may improve and hasten recognition of the value of its contributions to
environment and development, recognizing the continuing evolution and
uncertainty of scientific knowledge.
Concerning implementation (through Capacity-building) this chapter

finally suggests Codes of practice and guidelines, including on
appropriate principles, should be developed for and by the scientific
and technological community in the pursuit of its research activities and
implementation of programmes aimed at sustainable development.
May 15, 2008
57
Higher Education Teaching Personnel

1997 Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching
Personnel
Concerning institutional accountability a commitment to quality and excellence

with an obligation to protect and ensure the integrity of teaching, scholarship
and research against intrusions inconsistent with their academic missions
Demands that Higher-education teaching personnel have a right to carry out research
work without any interference, or any suppression, in accordance with their
professional responsibility and subject to nationally and internationally recognized
professional principles of intellectual rigour, scientific inquiry and research ethics.
Implication that educational or research quality is/can be affected by non-academic

(political, economic, etc.) forces
Suggests that higher education institutions, individually or collectively, should design

and implement appropriate systems of accountability, including quality assurance
mechanisms to achieve the above goals, without harming institutional autonomy or
academic freedom.
No specific reference to agriculture or sustainable development in any clauses, but

(e.g.) this international instrument as a whole could/should be better integrated with
development of quality guidelines and tools for capacity strengthening of the CGIAR
and NARS partners
May 15, 2008
58
World Declaration of Higher Education

1998 World Declaration of Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century:
Vision and Action and Framework for Priority Action for Change and
Development in Higher Education
The Declaration (Article 11) makes explicit reference to Qualitative

evaluation needs with quality in higher education as a
multidimensional concept embracing all its functions, and activities:
teaching and academic programmes, research and scholarship, staffing,
students, buildings, facilities, equipment, services to the community and the
academic environment.
The Declaration suggests internal self-evaluation and external review, conducted

openly by independent specialists is vital for enhancing quality.
The Declaration suggests independent national bodies be established and

comparative standards of quality, recognized at international level, be defined.
The Framework committed to using higher education autonomy and high

academic standards to contribute to the sustainable development of society
while developing their capacity to give forewarning through the analysis of
emerging social, cultural, economic and political trends, approached in a
multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary manner, giving particular attention to high
quality,
May 15, 2008
59
Declaration on Science
1999 Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific Knowledge
The Declaration suggested all countries should establish suitable measures to

address the ethics of the practice of science and of the use of scientific
knowledge and its applications. These should include due process procedures for
dealing with dissent and dissenters in a fair and responsive manner.
The Declaration suggested All scientists should commit themselves to high

ethical standards, and a code of ethics based on relevant norms enshrined in
international human rights instruments should be established for scientific
professions...The social responsibility of scientists requires that they maintain
high standards of scientific integrity and quality control, share their
knowledge, communicate with the public and educate the younger generation.
IMPLICATION - Science quality should be considered in terms of social

and political/human rights (as well as pedagogical) dimensions, and
ethical standards (including a code of ethics which should be part of quality
control systems). Science is not simply an objective (or purely empirical
undertaking).
May 15, 2008
60
Science Agenda
1999 Science Agenda - Framework of Action
The Framework stressed Each country should aim at having high-quality

scientific institutions capable of providing research and training facilities in
areas of specific interest. In those cases where countries are unable to
create such institutions, the necessary support should be granted by the
international community, through partnership and cooperation.
The Framework stressed Donor countries and agencies of the United

Nations system are urged to foster cooperation in order to improve the
quality and efficiency of their support to research in developing countries
and to bring high-quality science education to remote locations.
The Framework suggested national, regional and global environmental

research programmes should be strengthened or developed(to) include
programmes for capacity-building(while) the goals of the existing
international global environmental research programmes should be
vigorously pursued within the framework of Agenda 21 and the action plans
of the global conferences.
IMPLICATION - High quality science should be evaluated against

Agenda 21 goals and action plans of other global conferences
May 15, 2008
61
Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources

2001 International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture
Elements of the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE further reinforced,
Elements of 1992 Biodiversity Convention reinforced more specifically for plant

resources and agriculture
With respect to the particular concerns and needs of farmers Article 9 suggests
that national governments should take measures to protect and promote
Farmers Rights
BROADER IMPLICATIONS (for sustainable agriculture). The quality of

research and broader capacity-building, education and its training
objectives and outputs) could be better evaluated in terms of in terms of
appropriate knowledge, information, legal instruments and technical
skills certification (including bio-safety/biotechnology protocols) for
plant resources diversity conservation (quality of plant resources).
But also generally if/how capacity building/education programs reinforce/enable

implementation of human/farmers rights. More specifically the quality of
education/training programs or curricula might also include, for example,
learning objectives designed to facilitate/test farmers understandings of their
particular rights and their knowledge of specific legal instruments pertaining to
plant/agricultural biodiversity.
May 15, 2008
62
Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights

2005 Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UNESCO)
Suggested the need for (Article 23 Bioethics education, training and

information)
1. In order to promote the principles set out in this Declaration and to achieve
a better understanding of the ethical implications of scientific and
technological developments, in particular for young people, States should
endeavour to foster bioethics education and training at all levels as well as
to encourage information and knowledge dissemination programmes about
bioethics.
2. States should encourage the participation of international and regional
intergovernmental organizations and international, regional and national
non-governmental organizations in this endeavour.
IMPLICATION (for sustainable agriculture and education) - The quality

of agricultural education, research and capacity building/training
objectives could/should be evaluated in terms of adequacy of ethics
education and its application, especially for decision-making with respect
to scientific research and technical training which may (adversely)
undermine or impact traditional knowledge and biodiversity.
May 15, 2008
63
Quality / content of new agricultural knowledge, sciences & education
Summary comments / questions
Comments/Observations
Quality is a subjective issue (what is measured depends on beliefs and

assumptions about what should be valued and why There is lack of
agreement on this.
Quality planning or evaluations (education sector) need to differentiate

between or among
1) quality of administrative/process issues or institutions and
support structures;
2) equipment or other resources with necessary logistical or
technical support
3) teaching or facilitation quality; and
4) quality of academic content in courses, materials, research
results/products, etc., while continuing to resolving debates over what
should be learned, taught, or researched and why.
May 15, 2008
64
More discussion questions (1)
How or should (public) International Agricultural Research Organizations

(IAROs) insure coherence, effectiveness, authentic partnerships, and
greater (sustainable development) quality in achievements or impacts?
What kind of new quality learning is needed for National Agricultural

Research Systems (NARS)?
What resources for what purposes should IAROs or NARS invest in capacity
strengthening and learning to insure quality?
What do IAROs and NARS need to learn more of and better to reflect quality
in their research and education institutions ?
Does content matter for quality? (e.g. linked to UNESCO-DESD objectives

and Agenda 21 related conceptual/knowledge and policy frameworks)
Are more reforms needed for (public) higher education curricula, research
institutes, sciences?
May 15, 2008
65
More discussion questions (2)
Is more critical thinking and teaching on controversial issues, alternative

development paths, and new research methods, as well as agro-ecology,
social science, etc., needed? Are related curriculum reforms and teacher
training programmes possible? Could these contribute to better education
quality?
Can we better facilitate more authentic stakeholder dialogues/open

learning opportunities on controversial (and interrelated) agriculture,
environment and development issues (Education, not just training)?
If so how will/should such study, education processes, learning events and

dialogue be supported? Through traditional education systems as well as
open/online distance mechanisms?
Who should pay for quality and content assessments or learning system
improvements?
What else do we need to consider as essential for designing quality

education and research programs or testing and measuring quality?
May 15, 2008
66

UN-quality Assurance For Farming Programs

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

UN-quality Assurance For Farming Programs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quality assurance in agricultural

education and training

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality assurance in agricultural education and training

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality assurance in agricultural education and training

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality standards for sustainable agricultural research and education

The Tikapapa initiative

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality standards for sustainable agricultural research and education

The Tikapapa initiative

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality standards for sustainable agricultural research and education

Key issues/problems/challenges (1)

Lack of international policy or academic consensus on what counts as

Lack of clear policy or high level academic dialogue forums on ecological or

Questions/concerns about current subjectivity (political, corporate) with lack

Debates with some preliminary policy, corporate or academic documents

Sustainable agriculture education (academic courses, degrees, etc.)

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality standards for sustainable agricultural research and education

Key issues/problems/challenges (2)

However, there is a decline in the integrity and independence (including

Globalization across the education sector is increasing pressures toward

No clear political mandate or shared academic vision to support quality

Continued tensions/conflicts between

industrial, chemical, biotech, GMO and export-led agriculture models

local, organic, small farmer, subsistence approaches to academic

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

UN DESD (2005-2014)-UNESCO lead agency

The goalis to integrate the principles, values, and practices of

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

UN DESD (2005-2014)-UNESCO lead agency

UNESCO Quality perspectives (1)

At this point in time, quality education has essential characteristics that

supports a rights-based approach to all educational endeavours. Education

views the learner as an individual, a family member, community member,

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

UN DESD (2005-2014)-UNESCO lead agency

UNESCO Quality perspectives (2)

takes into consideration the social, economic, and environmental contexts

is informed by the past (e.g. indigenous and traditional knowledge), is

builds knowledge, life skills, perspectives, attitudes and values;

provides the tools to transform current societies to more sustainable

(from: United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality assurance in agricultural education and training

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality assurance in agriculture

Dimensions of food quality

May 15, 2008

CGIAR & UNU-EHS Quality assurance in AET

Quality assurance in agriculture

Dimensions of food quality

May 15, 2008